CAP Board Of Governors New Appointments, Change in Strategic Direction?

[Short Field]

So, it bothers you but does it bother the USAF?

[FW]

The endemic "corporate" pops up in everything from the move to peel off "USAF Aux" all over the place to, though members who can't spell the word salute, and into the triangle thingy.  It's with the far too many members forced to wear a different uniform, and in the way we deal with each other.

Wow, is this a record for changing this to uniform thread? 

On a more serious note; "we" peeled off the "USAF Aux" from our Aircraft for reasons the Air Force decided; not CAP.
We wear "CAP Distinctive" uniforms because the USAF refuses to compromise its standards more than 10% over its own.
You got me on the triangle thingy.
And, yes, we should do better in giving our senior members a better military C&D education; after all, that is our culture too.

The BoG's composition may or may not change any of the above however, for better or worse, it is the BoG which govern our affairs.  It is up to the 4 CAP members of the BoG to effectively bring the concerns of the organization to them and, with the help of our "corporate staff" move CAP forward.  The Air Force 4 can do their part by insisting we get the appropriate support and assistance from "big blue".  The Industry 3 can bring corporate tools and ideas in to assist and bring support to those CAP programs which can not be supported by the Air Force. 

Every thing else is up to the members. 

YMMV 

[BillB]

Not to disagree with anyone, but the basic change in CAP governence occured when USAF had a drawdown years ago. The position of USAF-CAP Liasion Officer (and staff) was eliminated and the State Director program was started. This eliminated alot of USAF oversight of CAP. The change from the Commander CAP-USAF from a flag grade Officer to a Colonel position also lowered the USAF control of CAP.
I'm not saying that USAF needs to have more oversight of CAP with new positions, but rather the changes made years ago have lowered the interface with USAF and CAP. In these tight budget times, any chance of USAF increasing oversight of CAP, other than through the Board of Governors is not practable.

[FW]

^For a complete history of CAP governance, I suggest we have Col Blaskovitch, our National Historian, to give us the real story. But, BillB, the answer to your comment is: "hogwash"

It is a common confusion to think of "oversight" as control and, as State Directors as having different authority than Wing LO's.  That is not correct.  Oversight of CAP is greater now than at any other time in our history.  Our funding depends on this oversight.  Any major deviation from accepted practice will jeopardize our grants.  Which, would mean death to CAP as we know it.

Our Board of Governors has 4 members exclusively appointed by the SECAF and, we have an "auxiliary board" office at the pentagon.  I would think our "interface" is greater now than at any time since we were under the watchful eyes of the Continental Air Command.

Just my opinion...

[Eclipse]

The endemic "corporate" pops up in everything from the move to peel off "USAF Aux" all over the place to, though members who can't spell the word salute, and into the triangle thingy.  It's with the far too many members forced to wear a different uniform, and in the way we deal with each other.

Wow, is this a record for changing this to uniform thread? 

On a more serious note; "we" peeled off the "USAF Aux" from our Aircraft for reasons the Air Force decided; not CAP.
We wear "CAP Distinctive" uniforms because the USAF refuses to compromise its standards more than 10% over its own.

I actually didn't intend to go that route - I'm talking about the mentality, not the actual insignia.

As to what we can or cannot request or get compromise on, etc., organizations which undersell and over-perform in a quiet, professional, manner are in a much better position to ask for things than organizations which are mired in unnecessary drama and stocked with people who live by a "you're lucky I showed up at all..." mantra.

We need some house cleaning from end to end, including a lot of the empty shirts and naysayers, and then a year or two of quiet over-performance, at which time we can then go to the table with real value and ask for what we need.

It is a common confusion to think of "oversight" as control and, as State Directors as having different authority than Wing LO's.  That is not correct.  Oversight of CAP is greater now than at any other time in our history. Our funding depends on this oversight.  Any major deviation from accepted practice will jeopardize our grants.  Which, would mean death to CAP as we know it.

Oversight is not leadership.

[billford1]

I had a good conversation recently with an AF Lt Col. He told us that the National Guard had their eyes on us and wanted our participation for what we could contribute in the future. I think that probably many in the AF notice us too. If the BOG could look for something to focus on maybe it could be greater emphasis on Professional Development. Our Squadron has a PDO who has a strong focus on Military Bearing particularly where it applies to a uniform appearance and things like how to stand in formation for occasions when we are on a Military Base. I think that perhaps the AF would like to see more emphasis on the basic fundamentals of CAP Officer Leadership in CAP. I would hope they would not be so concerned with driving new processes and practices into our culture but instead looking for what have been good practices in the past.